Speedwell
Well-Known Member
- May 11, 2016
- 23,928
- 17,625
- 81
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Other Religion
- Marital Status
- Married
Well, it appears that I have gotten what I asked for, but I had no idea that our views of scripture would turn out to be so profoundly different.
Something to keep in mind: Just as I believe that no possible discovery of science can deny God's authorship of the universe, I believe that no conclusion of the "higher critics," even if correct, can undermine the authority of scripture. I know that you have had to contend with people who think higher criticism does just that, but I do not and many, perhaps some millions, of Christians agree with me.
To set aside the vexed question of Genesis for a moment, consider the Book of Daniel as an example: There is a large body of convincing scholarship which attributes the Book of Daniel to an anonymous author writing in the mid second century BC during the tyranny of Antiochus IV rather than the time of Nebuchadnezzar in which it was set. Daniel was a well known folk hero and there are many stories about him in ancient Jewish and Canaanite literature (there are several, for example, to be found in the Apocrypha) so it is not unprecedented that an unknown author writing in the second century should produce another "Daniel" story to convey his message. I think it likely that you will not agree with any of this, but I find it plausible.
Further--and this is the important part--I do not believe that it necessarily constitutes a denial of the divine inspiration or authority of scripture nor, had Jesus happened to have quoted the Book of Daniel, would it amount to "calling Christ a liar."
Comments?
Something to keep in mind: Just as I believe that no possible discovery of science can deny God's authorship of the universe, I believe that no conclusion of the "higher critics," even if correct, can undermine the authority of scripture. I know that you have had to contend with people who think higher criticism does just that, but I do not and many, perhaps some millions, of Christians agree with me.
To set aside the vexed question of Genesis for a moment, consider the Book of Daniel as an example: There is a large body of convincing scholarship which attributes the Book of Daniel to an anonymous author writing in the mid second century BC during the tyranny of Antiochus IV rather than the time of Nebuchadnezzar in which it was set. Daniel was a well known folk hero and there are many stories about him in ancient Jewish and Canaanite literature (there are several, for example, to be found in the Apocrypha) so it is not unprecedented that an unknown author writing in the second century should produce another "Daniel" story to convey his message. I think it likely that you will not agree with any of this, but I find it plausible.
Further--and this is the important part--I do not believe that it necessarily constitutes a denial of the divine inspiration or authority of scripture nor, had Jesus happened to have quoted the Book of Daniel, would it amount to "calling Christ a liar."
Comments?
Upvote
0